Smt Kaveti Srujana

Page 1 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023)

IN THE COURT OF JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE

OF FIRST CLASS AT VEMULAWADA

Present: Smt. K. SRUJANA, I Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Sircilla. FAC: Junior Civil Judge, Vemulawada.

Friday, this the 28th day of June, 2024.

Original Suit No.113 of 2023

Between:

Gudua @ Gudem Chandu @ Chandra Reddy S/o Mallareddy, aged 39 years, Occ:

Agriculture, R/o. H.No. 2-39/2, R&R colony, Nelojupalle v/o Boinpalli Mandal of

Rajanna Sircilla District.

…Plaintiff

// A N D //

Erra Mahender S/o. Narsaiah, aged 39 years, Occ: Labour, R/o. H.No. 1-100, R&R colony, Nelojupalle v/o Boinpalli Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District.

Defendant

This suit is coming before me on 28.06.2024 for final hearing in the presence of Sri K. Purushotham, learned Advocate for the Plaintiff and defendant remained ex parte; and having been heard and having stood over for consideration, the Court delivered the following:

:: J U D G M E N T ::

This is a suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery of money of Rs.1,29,000/- (Rupees One lakh Twenty Nine thousand only) from the defendant with interest Rs.

41,280/- towards interest calculated @ Rs. 2/- per month on every hundred rupees from 12.02.2022 to 12.06.2023 on the principle amount of Rs. 1,29,000/-, totally

Page 2 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023)

Rs.1,70,280/- from the Defendant on the basis of promissory note dated:

12.02.2022.

BRIEF FACTS OF PLAINT:- 1.i.It is submitted that Plaintiff and Defendant are the same village persons and acquainted with each other, on the acquaintance the Defendant approached and requested to lend an amount of Rs. 1,29,000/- for the purpose of his family and other necessities i.e., purchasing auto, on the request of the Defendant, the Plaintiff gave an amount of Rs. 1,29,000/- on 12.02.2022 by executing a promissory note in favour of Plaintiff in the presence of witnesses. Defendant agreed to give above said loan and put the defendant sign as borrower and Guarantor in the above said promissory note, and also promised to repay the said loan amount with interest to the plaintiff within 6 months and by believing the defendant words the plaintiff adjusted above said amount but, the defendant did not keep up the defendant promise and not paid the plaintiff loan amounts after six months and also day to day postponed with false and lame reasons. Even though he several times demanded about his loan amount with interest, defendant refused.

ii)It is submitted that the plaintiff got issued legal notice to the defendant on 31-03-2023 through counsel by registrar post with We hereby acknowledge due, demanding the defendant to repay the said amount with interest within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said notice. The defendant received notice and gave reply on 13-04-2023 by denying my loan amount. Finally, I demanded the

Page 3 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023) defendant on 25-05-2023 at R and R colony Nilojipalli v/o. Boinpally mandal to repay the said loan amount with interest, but defendant bluntly refused to do so.

iii)It is submitted that defendant liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,29,000/- towards

principal amount and Rs.41,280/- towards interest calculated @ Rs.2/- per month

on every hundred rupees from 12-2-2022 to 12-6-2023 on principal amount of

Rs.1,29,000/- totally Rs.1,70,280/- (Rupees on lakh seventy thousand two hundred eighty rupees only) from the defendant to the plaintiff and future interest @ 18% per annum thereon from the date of filing of this suit to till realization of entire suit amount U.Sec.34 of C.P.C.

iv)It is submitted that the cause of action for the suit arose on 12-02-2022 at

Nilojipalle v/o. Boinpalli mandal, when and where the defendant had borrowed

Rs.1,29,000/- from the plaintiff and executed the suit promissory note in favour of the plaintiff and finally on 25-5-2023, at Nilojipalle v/o repayment of the said loan amount with interest, but defendant bluntly refused to do so. Hence, the suit.

2.Despite the knowledge of notice to the defendant, he failed to attend the

Court, as such he is remained exparte.

3. The plaintiff is examined himself as P.W.1 and got marked Exs.A1, A2 and A3.

Plaintiff got examined one Sudhala Venu by way of filing his chief examination affidavit as PW.2.

Page 4 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023)

4.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff.

5.Now the point for determination is:

Whether the suit can be decreed as prayed for?

POINT:-

6.PW.1 in his chief examination deposed that he and Defendant are the same villagers and well acquainted with each other, out of said acquaintances the

Defendant approached him and requested to lend an amount of Rs. 1,29,000/- (One lakh twenty nine thousand rupees) for the purpose of his family and other legal necessities i.e., purchasing Auto, on the request of the Defendant, PW.1 gave an amount of Rs. 1,29,000/- to the Defendant as a hand loan on 12.02.2022 on the same day the Defendant executed a promissory note in favour of him in the presence of witnesses and the Defendant agreed to give above said loan and put the

Defendant sign as borrower and guarantor in the above said promissory note, and the defendant also promised to repay the said loan amount with interest to him within 6 months and to prove the same Ex.A1 got marked.

7.PW.1 further submitted that by believing the defendant words he adjusted above said amount but, the defendant did not keep up the defendant promise and not paid his loan amount with interest after six months and also day to day postponed with false and lame reasons. Even though he several times demanded about his loan amount with interest, but the defendant did not heed the demands of

Page 5 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023) him and not pay the loan amount. So he vexed all the reasons of the defendant, as such he got issued legal notice to defendant on 31.03.2023 through his counsel Sri

K. Purushotham, Advocate, demanding the defendant to repay the said amount with interest within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said notice. The defendant received notice and gave reply on 13.04.2023 by denying his loan amount, to prove the same Ex.A2 got marked.

8.The deposition of PW.1 to the extent of that PW.1 had given hand loan of

Rs. 1,29,000/- in the presence of witnesses, for which defendant executed promissory note in Plaintiff favour, which got marked as Ex.A1. The witnesses are

S. Venu and G. Laxmi. The witness one S.Venu is examined as PW.2 and supported the version of PW.1, also submitted that he is the witness and signed as a witness in the said Ex.A1 i.e., promissory note and the Defendant also agreed to repay the said amount within 6 months.

9.The PW.1 deposed that defendant denied the loan amount in reply notice sent by defendant dated: 13.04.2023, to prove the same Ex.A3 is placed before this

Court.

10.Upon analyzing the Ex.A1 i.e., Promissory note, it establishes that defendant executed a promissory note in PW.1’s favour.

Page 6 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023)

11.Therefore, the above documentary evidence clearly established that the

Plaintiff has advanced a hand loan of Rs. 1,29,000/- to the defendant, after having received the said amount, he executed Ex.A1 in favour of Plaintiff in the presence of witnesses during the said transaction.

12.The above oral and documentary evidence on behalf of the Plaintiff was unchallenged by the defendant. In spite of giving ample opportunity through service of summons, even after giving several adjournments by this Court, the defendant failed to attend the Court and not rebut the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 and he remained exparte. Hence, it is held that the plaintiff had established his prima- facie case and that he is entitled for the relief(s) as prayed for. The point is answered accordingly.

13. In the result , the suit is decreed without costs against the defendant for an amount of Rs.1,70,280/- (Rupees One lakh Seventy thousand Two hundred and

Eighty only) together with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till date of decree and further @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on the principal amount of Rs.1,29,000/- (Rupees One lakh Twenty

Nine thousand only).

Typed to my dictation, seen, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 28 th day of June, 2024.

Junior Civil Judge, Vemulawada.

Page 7 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023)

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR THE PLAINTIFF:

PW1: Gudua @ Gudem Chandu @Chandra Reddy

PW2: Sudhala Venu

FOR THE DEFENDANT:

-NONE-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR THE PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A1Original promissory note dated: 12.02.2022.

Ex.A2Office copy of legal notice dated: 31.03.2023.

Ex.A3Reply legal notice dated: 13.04.2023.

FOR THE DEFENDANT:

-NIL-

Junior Civil Judge, Vemulawada.

Page 1 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023)

IN THE COURT OF JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE

OF FIRST CLASS AT VEMULAWADA

Present: Smt. K. SRUJANA, I Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Sircilla. FAC: Junior Civil Judge, Vemulawada.

Friday, this the 28th day of June, 2024.

Original Suit No.113 of 2023

Between:

Gudua @ Gudem Chandu @ Chandra Reddy S/o Mallareddy, aged 39 years, Occ:

Agriculture, R/o. H.No. 2-39/2, R&R colony, Nelojupalle v/o Boinpalli Mandal of

Rajanna Sircilla District.

…Plaintiff

// A N D //

Erra Mahender S/o. Narsaiah, aged 39 years, Occ: Labour, R/o. H.No. 1-100, R&R colony, Nelojupalle v/o Boinpalli Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District.

Defendant

This suit is coming before me on 28.06.2024 for final hearing in the presence of Sri K. Purushotham, learned Advocate for the Plaintiff and defendant remained ex parte; and having been heard and having stood over for consideration, the Court delivered the following:

:: J U D G M E N T ::

This is a suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery of money of Rs.1,29,000/- (Rupees One lakh Twenty Nine thousand only) from the defendant with interest Rs.

41,280/- towards interest calculated @ Rs. 2/- per month on every hundred rupees from 12.02.2022 to 12.06.2023 on the principle amount of Rs. 1,29,000/-, totally

Page 2 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023)

Rs.1,70,280/- from the Defendant on the basis of promissory note dated:

12.02.2022.

BRIEF FACTS OF PLAINT:- 1.i.It is submitted that Plaintiff and Defendant are the same village persons and acquainted with each other, on the acquaintance the Defendant approached and requested to lend an amount of Rs. 1,29,000/- for the purpose of his family and other necessities i.e., purchasing auto, on the request of the Defendant, the Plaintiff gave an amount of Rs. 1,29,000/- on 12.02.2022 by executing a promissory note in favour of Plaintiff in the presence of witnesses. Defendant agreed to give above said loan and put the defendant sign as borrower and Guarantor in the above said promissory note, and also promised to repay the said loan amount with interest to the plaintiff within 6 months and by believing the defendant words the plaintiff adjusted above said amount but, the defendant did not keep up the defendant promise and not paid the plaintiff loan amounts after six months and also day to day postponed with false and lame reasons. Even though he several times demanded about his loan amount with interest, defendant refused.

ii)It is submitted that the plaintiff got issued legal notice to the defendant on 31-03-2023 through counsel by registrar post with We hereby acknowledge due, demanding the defendant to repay the said amount with interest within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said notice. The defendant received notice and gave reply on 13-04-2023 by denying my loan amount. Finally, I demanded the

Page 3 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023) defendant on 25-05-2023 at R and R colony Nilojipalli v/o. Boinpally mandal to repay the said loan amount with interest, but defendant bluntly refused to do so.

iii)It is submitted that defendant liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,29,000/- towards

principal amount and Rs.41,280/- towards interest calculated @ Rs.2/- per month

on every hundred rupees from 12-2-2022 to 12-6-2023 on principal amount of

Rs.1,29,000/- totally Rs.1,70,280/- (Rupees on lakh seventy thousand two hundred eighty rupees only) from the defendant to the plaintiff and future interest @ 18% per annum thereon from the date of filing of this suit to till realization of entire suit amount U.Sec.34 of C.P.C.

iv)It is submitted that the cause of action for the suit arose on 12-02-2022 at

Nilojipalle v/o. Boinpalli mandal, when and where the defendant had borrowed

Rs.1,29,000/- from the plaintiff and executed the suit promissory note in favour of the plaintiff and finally on 25-5-2023, at Nilojipalle v/o repayment of the said loan amount with interest, but defendant bluntly refused to do so. Hence, the suit.

2.Despite the knowledge of notice to the defendant, he failed to attend the

Court, as such he is remained exparte.

3. The plaintiff is examined himself as P.W.1 and got marked Exs.A1, A2 and A3.

Plaintiff got examined one Sudhala Venu by way of filing his chief examination affidavit as PW.2.

Page 4 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023)

4.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff.

5.Now the point for determination is:

Whether the suit can be decreed as prayed for?

POINT:-

6.PW.1 in his chief examination deposed that he and Defendant are the same villagers and well acquainted with each other, out of said acquaintances the

Defendant approached him and requested to lend an amount of Rs. 1,29,000/- (One lakh twenty nine thousand rupees) for the purpose of his family and other legal necessities i.e., purchasing Auto, on the request of the Defendant, PW.1 gave an amount of Rs. 1,29,000/- to the Defendant as a hand loan on 12.02.2022 on the same day the Defendant executed a promissory note in favour of him in the presence of witnesses and the Defendant agreed to give above said loan and put the

Defendant sign as borrower and guarantor in the above said promissory note, and the defendant also promised to repay the said loan amount with interest to him within 6 months and to prove the same Ex.A1 got marked.

7.PW.1 further submitted that by believing the defendant words he adjusted above said amount but, the defendant did not keep up the defendant promise and not paid his loan amount with interest after six months and also day to day postponed with false and lame reasons. Even though he several times demanded about his loan amount with interest, but the defendant did not heed the demands of

Page 5 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023) him and not pay the loan amount. So he vexed all the reasons of the defendant, as such he got issued legal notice to defendant on 31.03.2023 through his counsel Sri

K. Purushotham, Advocate, demanding the defendant to repay the said amount with interest within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said notice. The defendant received notice and gave reply on 13.04.2023 by denying his loan amount, to prove the same Ex.A2 got marked.

8.The deposition of PW.1 to the extent of that PW.1 had given hand loan of

Rs. 1,29,000/- in the presence of witnesses, for which defendant executed promissory note in Plaintiff favour, which got marked as Ex.A1. The witnesses are

S. Venu and G. Laxmi. The witness one S.Venu is examined as PW.2 and supported the version of PW.1, also submitted that he is the witness and signed as a witness in the said Ex.A1 i.e., promissory note and the Defendant also agreed to repay the said amount within 6 months.

9.The PW.1 deposed that defendant denied the loan amount in reply notice sent by defendant dated: 13.04.2023, to prove the same Ex.A3 is placed before this

Court.

10.Upon analyzing the Ex.A1 i.e., Promissory note, it establishes that defendant executed a promissory note in PW.1’s favour.

Page 6 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023)

11.Therefore, the above documentary evidence clearly established that the

Plaintiff has advanced a hand loan of Rs. 1,29,000/- to the defendant, after having received the said amount, he executed Ex.A1 in favour of Plaintiff in the presence of witnesses during the said transaction.

12.The above oral and documentary evidence on behalf of the Plaintiff was unchallenged by the defendant. In spite of giving ample opportunity through service of summons, even after giving several adjournments by this Court, the defendant failed to attend the Court and not rebut the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 and he remained exparte. Hence, it is held that the plaintiff had established his prima- facie case and that he is entitled for the relief(s) as prayed for. The point is answered accordingly.

13. In the result , the suit is decreed without costs against the defendant for an amount of Rs.1,70,280/- (Rupees One lakh Seventy thousand Two hundred and

Eighty only) together with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till date of decree and further @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on the principal amount of Rs.1,29,000/- (Rupees One lakh Twenty

Nine thousand only).

Typed to my dictation, seen, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 28 th day of June, 2024.

Junior Civil Judge, Vemulawada.

Page 7 to 7 Fair (O.S.No. 113 of 2023)

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR THE PLAINTIFF:

PW1: Gudua @ Gudem Chandu @Chandra Reddy

PW2: Sudhala Venu

FOR THE DEFENDANT:

-NONE-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR THE PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A1Original promissory note dated: 12.02.2022.

Ex.A2Office copy of legal notice dated: 31.03.2023.

Ex.A3Reply legal notice dated: 13.04.2023.

FOR THE DEFENDANT:

-NIL-

Junior Civil Judge, Vemulawada.

IN THE COURT OF THE I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I Additional Judicial

Magistrate of First Class Rajanna Sircilla: KARIMNAGAR

Present: Smt Kaveti Srujana, I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I Additional Judicial

Magistrate of First Class Rajanna Sircilla,

KARIMNAGAR .

07-05-2026

CC/1416/2021

TSRS020019712021

Between:-

State of Telangana Address: near grama panchayath, Veernapalli,Rajanna Sircilla

ADVOCATE: … Plaintiff/Petitioner

AND

Mudavath Shankar Address: babai CHERUVU tHANDA,VEERNAPALLY,Babai Cheruvu Thanda,Rajanna Sircilla,Telangana 2:mUDAVATH mAMATHA Age: 25 Occupation : babai Cheruvu tHANDA

VEERNAPALLY

Babai Cheruvu Thanda Rajanna Sircilla Telangana 3:mUDAVATH yASHODA Age: 47 Occupation : BABAI cHERUVU tHANDA

VEERNAPALLY

Babai Cheruvu Thanda Rajanna Sircilla Telangana 4:bADHAVATH rAJESHWARI Age: 24 Occupation : dHUBBAKA dHARPALLY Babai Cheruvu Thanda Nizamabad Telangan ADVOCATE: … Defendant/Respondent

ORDER

The case is suomoto advanced to today from 14-05-2026, inview of filing of petition u/sec.20 of L.S. Act. A1 to A4 called present. NBW recalled against accused A1 to A4. The defacto complainant/LW1/injured/ Mudavanth Raghu alias Raghupathi LW2/ Mudavath Mena and accused/A1 Mudavath Shankar, A2 Mudavath Mamatha, A3. Yashoda, A4. Badavath Rajeshweri are present before this court and sought permission to compound the Offence U/sec.s, 323, 506 of IPC. The learned APPO filed petition U/sec.216 of Cr.P.C to alter the section of law from 324 of IPC to Section of law 323 of IPC. The APPO filed petition for withdrawal of the case for the offence u/sec.290 of IPC against accused A1 to A4 and the same is accepted and as the matter ended into compromise, the same is allowed. The above said offence is compoundable in nature and hence permission accorded. Accordingly compromise is recorded as per the award. At request of parties and APP, the matter is referred to Lok Adalath. The matter is settled

before Lok Adalath as per the award for the offence u/secs. 323, 506 of IPC. No case

property is deposited before this court. Hence, the accused A1 to A4 are acquitted u/sec.320(8) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of said accused shall stands cancelled forthwith.

This Order Generated in CIS on 11-05-2026

I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I

Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class Rajanna Sircilla

KARIMNAGAR.

In the Court of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I Additional Judicial Magistrate

of First Class Rajanna Sircilla

Present: Smt Kaveti Srujana, I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I

Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class

Rajanna Sircilla.

Date of disposal: 07-05-2026

DVC/16/2026

TSRS020004242026

Between:

P1. Paati alias Nerati Maneesha Address: W/o.Neerati Paati Vamshi (D/o. Neerati Babu), age.26 yrs. Religion. Christian, occ. Housewife, R/o. H.No.2-92, Ramannapet village Chandurthy mandal of Rajanna Sircilla District. Present R/o. H.No.1-180, Kishandaspet, Yerllareddypet proper and mandal of Rajanna Sircilla district.

2: P2. Paati Jaswa

Age: 55 Occupation : Minor U/G Ship his natural mother Paati alias Neerati Maneesha W/o. Paati Vamshil (D/o. Neerati Babu) age 26 yrs. Religion Charistian occ. Housewife R/o. H.No. 2-92 Ramannapet village of Chandurthy manadal of Rajanna Sircilla presently residing at her parent R/o. H.No.10-180 Kishandaspet Yellareddypet proper and mandal of Rajanna Sircilla

Advocate: . … Complainant

//And//

R1. Patti Vamshi Address: S/o. Late Rajaiah alias Laxmirajam, age. 30 yrs. occ. Software Engineer, R/o. H.No.2-92, Ramannapet village of Chandurthy mandal of Rajanna Sircilla district.

2:R2. Paati Devavva Age: 0 Occupation : W/o. Late Rajaiah alias Laxmirajam age. 55yrs. occ.housewife R/o. H.No.2-92 Ramannapet village of Chandurthy mandal of Rajanna Sircilla district.

3:R3. Paati Rajender Age: 0 Occupation : S/o. Late Rajaiah alias Laxmirajam R/o. H.No.2-92 Ramannapet village of Chandurthy mandal of Rajanna Sircilla District.

4:R4 Paati Salonika Age: 0 Occupation : W/o. Rajender age.35 yrs. R/o. H.No.2-92 Ramannapet village of Chandurthy mandal of Rajanna Sircilla District

Advocate: . … Accused

Offence: 12 (1) of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act -

::ORDER::

Petitioner No.1/Aggrieved person and counsel for the Aggrieved person/petitioner No.1 are called present. Respondents No.1 and 2 are present. Memo filed by counsel for the petitioners/aggrieved persons stating that the aggrieved persons are not interested to proceed with the above said case. Hence, considering the above facts and circumstances the above case dismissed as not pressed.

(This order generated in CIS on 11-05-2026).

I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I Additional

Judicial Magistrate of First Class Rajanna Sircilla.

IN THE COURT OF THE I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I Additional Judicial

Magistrate of First Class Rajanna Sircilla: KARIMNAGAR

Present: Smt Kaveti Srujana, I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I Additional Judicial

Magistrate of First Class Rajanna Sircilla,

KARIMNAGAR .

07-05-2026

CC/1666/2021

TSRS020023472021

Between:- State of Telangana Address: near grama panchayath, Veernapalli,Rajanna Sircilla. ADVOCATE: … Plaintiff/Petitioner

AND

MUDAVATH Raghu Address: Babai Cheruvu Thanda,veernapally,Babai Cheruvu Thanda,Rajanna Sircilla,Telangana 2:Mudavath Mena Age: 31 Occupation : babai Cheruvu Thanda veernapally Babai Cheruvu Thanda Rajanna Sircilla Telangan ADVOCATE: … Defendant/Respondent

ORDER

The case is suomoto advanced to today from 06-07-2026, in view of filing of petition u/s.20 of L.S.Act. A1 and A2 called present. NBW Recalled against accused A1and A2. The Defacto complainant/LW1/ injured/ MudavathMamatha, Lw2/ injured /eye witness / Mudavath Shankar, LW4/injured Bhukya alias Badavath Rajeshweri and accused no.1 and 2 are present before this Court and sought permission to compound the offence U/secs.448, 323, 506 r/w 34 of IPC. The learned APPO filed petition u/sec.216 of Cr.P.C to alter the section of law from 324 of IPC to section of law 323 of IPC. The APPO filed petition for withdrawal of the case for the offence u/sec.290 of IPC against accused A1and A2 and the same is accepted and as the matter ended into compromise, the same is allowed. The above said offence is compoundable in nature and hence permission accorded. Accordingly compromise is recorded as per the award. At request of parties and APP, the matter is referred to Lok Adalath. The matter is settled before Lok Adalath as per the award for the offence u/secs.448, 323, 506 r/w 34 of IPC. Hence, the accused No.1 and 2 are acquitted u/s.320(8) Cr.P.C. No case property is deposited before this court. The bail bonds of said accused shall stands cancelled

This Order Generated in CIS on 11-05-2026

I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I

Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class Rajanna Sircilla

KARIMNAGAR